The Prophet Zul had a vision of Garrosh's deal with Kairoz. Using the BIG BAD VOODOO, he forged a link between himself and Kairoz, such that he was later able to open to portal to Draenor.

When Garrosh's vision of an Iron Horde began to falter under Alliance and Horde onslaught, Zul was waiting. At a critical moment, he opened the portal, and the Zandalari quickly overwhelmed Garrosh and other Chieftains of the Iron Horde, putting themselves in a position of power, and the Iron Horde in their debt. The Zandalari mean to get to their natural place on this new world - rulers, looking down on everyone.

Darielle wrote:Let's say that you can adjust your raid comp so that 6 people cover all loot needs.

- Run raid with 6 mains and funnel loot to them.- Run raid with 6 new mains, the 6 existing mains, funnel loot to new mains.- Run raid with 6 new mains, 12 existing mains, funnel loot to new mains.- RUn raid with 6 new mains, 14 existing mains, funnel loot to new mains.- Run raid with any new mains left + primary alts, 14 existing mains, funnel loot......

That doesn't really work.

The number of loot pieces that drop depends on the number of characters that are eligible for loot. Characters that are on their second (or later) run, are not eligible, so they will not count towards the number of pieces. On your 3rd/4th way through with your plan, you'd get 1-2 pieces, rather than 4 pieces.

Also, with the gear homogenization, especially at the start, you can have at most 4 characters that do not share gear. Cloth/Leather/Mail/Plate with the Tank/Healer/Caster/Physical role.

But yes, that was the first thing that struck my mind, when I noticed there would be a mode without personal loot that was not locked out with the highest difficulty mode. I actually thought that was the main reason they went with personal loot for Flex, to prevent such shenanigans.

Nooska wrote:Yeah, I get that, I'm just wondering why Newsom is saying "[run] all difficulties at least twice (probably more) every week" - I get the concern of running all diff every week at the beginning (gearing up and what not), but running all of them twice per week - what am I overlooking here?

Because alts. Here's how it has been working this expansion for "hardcore" heroic progression guilds:

First week of a tier, only normal mode is available. Since the normal mode gear is superior to previous tier heroic mode gear, we want to get as much of it as possible for heroic progression. The way you do this is to run multiple mixed alt and main raids, and funnel all the gear to the mains. This tier we only had enough alts for 2x25 man raids in my guild, but many guilds run even more (and we would have if we were more prepared). I think Method ran something like 6 mixed alt/main raids the first week of normal mode.

We even continued this the first few weeks of heroic progression this tier since the gear gap was so enormous (thanks to flex) plus overpowered trinkets. We kill one boss on heroic, then all the mains who sat out + alts to fill the raid kills the boss again on normal. Repeat for the next boss.

It's not super fun, but if you want the gear needed to get a leg up this is how it works. It will be even worse in WoD (at least the first tier when people are in blues) with the added "fun" of Normal (current Flex) mode on top of this. No forced personal loot means we can funnel more gear to mains using alts.

At BlizzCon, we'd discussed some improvements to our Flexible scaling system that would minimize the existence and impact of any real or perceived "breakpoints." Our design goal has always been for the system to be neutral with respect to group size. Specifically, you should never feel encouraged to turn away interested players whose skill/gear level matches the rest of the group's, basic role composition constraints notwithstanding. But at the same time, you shouldn't feel like you need to go out and grab warm bodies if you have a perfectly serviceable raid already assembled. Clearly we have not yet fully realized those goals.

In general, the existing healing/damage scaling slightly favors larger groups, since boss health and damage scale up more slowly than does raid throughput. To use a specific example, an 18-player raid with 12 damage-dealers will kill a boss slightly faster than a 10-player raid with 6 damage-dealers (assuming equal skill/gear between the two groups). But it is true that currently some specific abilities exhibit breakpoints, where adding an extra player causes an extra add to spawn, or an ability to strike an additional target.

To help smooth out difficulty scaling as you add or remove players from your Flexible raid, we will be implementing one of our planned Warlords changes to the scaling system ahead of schedule. In the near future, several boss abilities that target more players as the size of a Flex raid increases will use weighted randomization rather than strict breakpoints.

An example to illustrate what I mean:

Today, Sun Tenderheart's Shadow Word: Bane ability afflicts 2 targets if your raid size is between 10 and 14, but begins to hit a third target at 15.

Once our upcoming change is in place, if you have a 13-player raid, there will be a 60% chance for each cast of the ability to hit 3 targets, and a 40% chance for it to hit 2. If you add an extra player, and thus have 14, there will now be an 80% chance for 3 debuffs to go out, and a 20% chance for only 2.

In short, with respect to this particular ability, adding an extra player will always give you an average of 0.2 extra Bane debuffs. No more breakpoints!

There will be a handful of exceptions where breakpoints remain necessary. Imprison on Sha of Pride is probably the most notable such example, where you really want to pre-plan who will cover which prisons, and having a random number of targets each cast would cause frustrating unpredictability.

There's nothing wrong with 14-player groups -- 14 players is a great size for a raid. But so is 15. And 19. And 12. And 22. We just want to help make sure that good players aren't being turned away from groups because of the notion that their presence will make things harder for everyone.http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic ... ?page=4#77

I don't think people actively tryed fixed setups for Flex... or did we get to THAT point? Pugs pretending to be super hardcore?

theckhd wrote:Fuck no, we've seen what you do to guilds. Just imagine what you could do to an entire country. Just visiting the US might be enough to make the southern states try to secede again.

halabar wrote:Noo.. you don't realize the problem. Worldie was to negative guild breaking energy like Bolvar is to the Scourge. If Worldie is removed, than someone must pick up that mantle, otherwise that negative guild breaking energy will run rampant, destroying all the servers.

The number of loot pieces that drop depends on the number of characters that are eligible for loot. Characters that are on their second (or later) run, are not eligible, so they will not count towards the number of pieces. On your 3rd/4th way through with your plan, you'd get 1-2 pieces, rather than 4 pieces.

Also, with the gear homogenization, especially at the start, you can have at most 4 characters that do not share gear. Cloth/Leather/Mail/Plate with the Tank/Healer/Caster/Physical role.

But yes, that was the first thing that struck my mind, when I noticed there would be a mode without personal loot that was not locked out with the highest difficulty mode. I actually thought that was the main reason they went with personal loot for Flex, to prevent such shenanigans.

Well sort of. That's the use of a strict 20 people raid with mostly all mains to illustrate the sheer number of runs possible. Because you can mix and match alts into the game, it becomes a chess puzzle of alts that you don't care about gearing in the place of "mains". Because it's Flexible, you can fine-grain that even better if you make multiple runs happen at the same time, along with some critical mains (e.g. Tanks) just to trivialise what might be the hardest parts.

I don't think people actively tryed fixed setups for Flex... or did we get to THAT point? Pugs pretending to be super hardcore?

It happens a lot in NA supposedly. I wouldn't know because I don't have time to care about PuG Flex.

Last edited by Darielle on Tue Dec 10, 2013 1:37 am, edited 1 time in total.

Well the few flex pugs I joined just aimed for a proper setup hardly cared about the number.

theckhd wrote:Fuck no, we've seen what you do to guilds. Just imagine what you could do to an entire country. Just visiting the US might be enough to make the southern states try to secede again.

halabar wrote:Noo.. you don't realize the problem. Worldie was to negative guild breaking energy like Bolvar is to the Scourge. If Worldie is removed, than someone must pick up that mantle, otherwise that negative guild breaking energy will run rampant, destroying all the servers.

Brekkie:Tanks are like shitty DPS. And healers are like REALLY distracted DPSAmirya:Why yes, your penis is longer than his because you hit 30k dps in the first 10 seconds. But guess what? That raid boss has a dick bigger than your ego. Flex:I don't make mistakes. I execute carefully planned strategic group wipes.Levie:(in /g) It's weird, I have a collar and I dont know where I got it from, Worgen are kinky!Levie:Drunk Lev goes and does what he pleases just to annoy sober Lev.Sagara:You see, you need to *spread* the bun before you insert the hot dog.

theckhd wrote:Fuck no, we've seen what you do to guilds. Just imagine what you could do to an entire country. Just visiting the US might be enough to make the southern states try to secede again.

halabar wrote:Noo.. you don't realize the problem. Worldie was to negative guild breaking energy like Bolvar is to the Scourge. If Worldie is removed, than someone must pick up that mantle, otherwise that negative guild breaking energy will run rampant, destroying all the servers.

Also keep in mind that Flex was two levels below the highest difficulty level, so the people that actually put an effort into pugging it usually didn't care about making it slightly more or less difficult.

In Warlords, one level below the highest difficulty level will also be Flexible, so groups might struggle with it some more. Therefor, reducing these breakpoints will be more important.

I do imagine they could create a slightly higher ilvl gap between the different difficulty levels from the very start, so that next tiers can still be quite a bit of an upgrade without being an interesting upgrade for higher difficulty levels. For the first tier in each expansion, that will not be an option.

Alternatively, they could start to consider some more serious solution. For example, if you kill boss X on a certain difficulty level, then next week, you will not be eligible for loot for boss X on all lower difficulty levels (as if you looted the boss at the start of the week).

On an unrelated note, how many people that originated on Bloodscalp remain on Twisting Nether?

Thels wrote:Also keep in mind that Flex was two levels below the highest difficulty level, so the people that actually put an effort into pugging it usually didn't care about making it slightly more or less difficult.

In Warlords, one level below the highest difficulty level will also be Flexible, so groups might struggle with it some more. Therefor, reducing these breakpoints will be more important.

I do imagine they could create a slightly higher ilvl gap between the different difficulty levels from the very start, so that next tiers can still be quite a bit of an upgrade without being an interesting upgrade for higher difficulty levels. For the first tier in each expansion, that will not be an option.

Alternatively, they could start to consider some more serious solution. For example, if you kill boss X on a certain difficulty level, then next week, you will not be eligible for loot for boss X on all lower difficulty levels (as if you looted the boss at the start of the week).

On an unrelated note, how many people that originated on Bloodscalp remain on Twisting Nether?

I like that concept, but there needs checks and balances or you're going to create serious stress. What happens when your top healer can't make it that week, and you can't repeat that kill on the progression boss? Though love, baby, no downgrading to gear up alts/backups.

I'd honestly say - I'm stumped.

When that day comes, seek all the light and wonder of this world, and fight.

Sagara wrote:I like that concept, but there needs checks and balances or you're going to create serious stress. What happens when your top healer can't make it that week, and you can't repeat that kill on the progression boss? Though love, baby, no downgrading to gear up alts/backups.

I'd honestly say - I'm stumped.

Ehh, let's see here.

Let's assume we're talking about a guild that can clear the 6 boss raid instance on mythic since week 12. They did a full clear on week 13 and 14. On week 15, they killed the first 3 bosses, and then stopped for whatever reason, and are unable to continue killing any bosses.

They would be unable to clear the instance on heroic during week 15. Well, technically, they could, but since everyone killed the boss on Mythic during week 14, they won't get any Heroic gear during week 15.

However, they can go in during week 16, and receive loot from the last 3 bosses, as they didn't kill them on mythic during week 15. In addition, they can clear the entire instance on mythic again.

So it basically shifts a week.

I'm also thinking that, for it to work, it would be better to go 1 difficulty level per week, rather than all 3 difficulty levels during one week.

Basically, that would create the following shared loot lockout:Mythic during week NHeroic during week N+1Normal during week N+2LFR during week N+3

Since you can't go back in time (pun intended), you never have to worry about killing bosses on a certain difficulty level screwing you out of loot from higher difficulty levels, so you don't have to worry about "Can I do Normal today, or do I hope to join a Heroic run tomorrow?".

The only downside is that it might be unclear and unintuitive, so it would require Blizzard making quite clear what bosses people can and cannot loot during this week.

Another, perhaps easier way to look at it, instead of a weekly reset on all the loot, every boss only resets loot on the highest difficulty level that needs resetting.

During week 1, all 6 bosses are eligible for loot on all 4 difficulties. (Not much can be done about that, except pushing LFR to week 2.)

Say you kill all 6 bosses on normal, and kill the first 3 bosses on heroic. You also join some friends and kill the first boss on mythic. At the end of the week, your loot eligibility is:

Then, when the next week starts, each boss resets on the highest difficulty level. Boss 1 resets on Mythic difficulty level, bosses 2 and 3 on Heroic, and bosses 4 to 6 on Normal, so at the start of the second week, your loot eligibility would be:

Now, assuming you're at week 12. You cleared Mythic difficulty, and you killed every single boss on every single difficulty level this week, so you're not eligible for loot for anything. On week 13, you're only eligible for loot for Mythic for all 6 bosses.

But you're taking a well-deserved vacation on week 13, and don't kill any bosses. On week 14, you're eligible for loot for Mythic and for Heroic for all 6 bosses.

Darielle wrote:When the Dark Portal Opened, King Rastakhan send his Zandalari to invade the portal and claim this new world as a new home to replace their dying one. In a silent and deadly strike, they took control of the portal and sent in an army to pave the way.

These Zandalar were forever changed by this SAVAGE world to become SAVAGE trolls. They also allied with the Gronn, who wished to be free of the Iron Horde. Because Gruul.

Anyhow, I posted that idea 2 months ago, but I still think it's the most "Clean" way to handle the lockouts, letting everyone play at whatever level suits best for them without having to run lower levels every week, and still not miss out on a single piece of loot.

The rule itself is very simple and short: "Every week, each boss resets the loot lockout on the most difficult level upon which it was locked out."

Explaining the result of those rules might be a little unclear, but I think there would be quite an easy way to make it clear. Provide a panel that lists all bosses for the expansion, sorted with the most recently added raid instance (or world bosses) at the top of the list, then add 4 columns, one for each difficulty level, so each boss has 4 icons behind it. A green icon indicates that you are eligible for loot from that boss. A red icon indicates that you are no longer eligible for loot from that boss. An orange icon indicates that you are no longer eligible for loot from that boss during this week, but you will become eligible for loot from that boss during the next week (assuming you don't kill the boss on higher difficulty levels before the end of the next week.

Mythic of course has instance lockout on top of loot lockout, but since Mythic is the most difficult level, Mythic loot lockout would always reset, so this would not be an issue.

Remember Blizzard's stance about the lockouts: It's *your* problem if you want to run lower difficulties for minimal upgrades. Blizzard expects that if you are a Mythic raider, you only run Mythic and don't care about lower difficulties.

theckhd wrote:Fuck no, we've seen what you do to guilds. Just imagine what you could do to an entire country. Just visiting the US might be enough to make the southern states try to secede again.

halabar wrote:Noo.. you don't realize the problem. Worldie was to negative guild breaking energy like Bolvar is to the Scourge. If Worldie is removed, than someone must pick up that mantle, otherwise that negative guild breaking energy will run rampant, destroying all the servers.